A Society Without God

[howitzer24]

I've come to the same conclusion these people have that there is no beginning or end to this.

[jojoinhere]

"religion start when the first con man met the first fool."

or something like that i remember.

[rationalmuscle]

@jojoinhere Sound about right. 

[joshuag73]

@jojoinhere

Obviously water has not always existed so even though they are nice and simple people they are still flawed in their thinking. Matter has a beginning. To say that matter always existed violates causality, as well as many laws of scientific reason.

[Tonithenightowl]

Considering our complex thinking bc of religion ( trying to make it all fit) I applaud these simple but astute tribal people. Missionaries believe all are lost that don't have Jesus, but are they? They don't have the same moral system bogged down by religion. They apparently know something we don't. They don't seem to be concerned with greed and control, so who is the real heathen?

[rationalmuscle]

@Tonithenightowl Indeed! Thanks for the comment.

[agente180]

Is it that they just don't have a creation or God story, or they just don't like thinking beyond themselves nor bother to ponder of things across time. It is an interesting situation not just for religion but, things learned from ancient times, remembrance of stories about their great great grandfathers, or past and future floodings,... It reminds me of the irresponsible attitude some have in our society, like drunks or a teen that hates to study or dna limited brain? Or Adam in Eden pre Snake?

[rationalmuscle]

@agente180 I have not read the entire book, but I would recommend it from what I have read. They definitely have 'no' concept of a deity whatsoever. That is clear. Their concepts of past is explained and it's a bit difficult to decipher. Basically they know only their most recent past but do not consider it "past"... it's remembered so it's NOW. Odd, eh?

[yellowlynx]

@agente180 It is not that they dislike thinking beyond themselves nor bother to ponder of things across time, they simply are not concerned or obsessed with it -- it is the attitude of here and now. If they do think about the past or future, it is only as a means to live for the present.

[BigB198373]

It's wonderful to see a stone age group of people that is more philisophically advanced than the "civilized" world's top theologians.

[rationalmuscle]

@BigB198373 I'm sure the theologians would disagree because, after all, these primitives often take multiple wives (kinda like Solomon... David... Jesus' parable of the Virgins... etc.) and don't speak English (kinda like Solomon... David... Jesus...)

: )

[ishbit]

Romans 1: 19-20 is often cited by hive minded fundies. These verses equate to a biblical backpedal, serving as a smoke screen for allegiance to their sky daddy.

Setting the stage for two logical fallacies; Paul was clearly urgent to prove his point.

1. Argumentum ad populum - concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it.

2. Ignoratio elenchi - an informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.

[rationalmuscle]

@ishbit Good points ishbit. Love the last fallacy... : )

[davisdebard]

What is the musical artist that plays in this video?

[rationalmuscle]

@davisdebard The intro is from "2+2=5" by Radiohead.

[Byfbowhiffen]

@davisdebard Radiohead - 2 + 2 = 5 (The Lukewarm.)

[vaguelyhumanoid]

No supreme creator... the world just always was.

That's real wisdom that a lot of our "civilized" cultures could learn well from.

My pet rat died yesterday, but I didn't feel bad because I knew he was at peace, and it was the end of his natural lifespan... I'd make a good Pirahã, methinks.

[rationalmuscle]

@vaguelyhumanoid I had this conversation last week with a recently de-converted pastor. He still had the question about death and fear re: "just going into the void."

"What do you think life after death will be like," he asked.

"What was life like before you were born?"

I think that settled the matter. : )

[IdealVoyage]

too bad the whole world can not be like this

[rationalmuscle]

@IdealVoyage There would be a lot less bloodshed, that's for sure.

[TruthSurge]

Great. I've been looking for a place on the globe without any religious nutjobs so I could go there and live.

[rationalmuscle]

@TruthSurge Ha! ; )

[Sahshagirl09]

@rationalmuscle We should all learn from the Piraha.

[rationalmuscle]

@Sahshagirl09 Indeed we should. Thanks sahshagirl09.

[flubno]

Im atheist, I decieded that most religions are primative and not worth believing in. I do like morality, but the conciept of morality excisted thousands of years before organzied religion. Science doesn't have much either. the smartest people in the world have only barely scratched the surface of what's out there. Im atheist,I dont believe in absolutes or religion or god

[rationalmuscle]

@flubno Well flubno, I agree with your points re: morality. Morality has evolved quite nicely for the most part over time as we quickly learn (well, some of us!) that we have to work together in order to progress. I think this is the basis for all morality, even self-sacrifice. Not sure what you mean about science; seems to me science has been the greatest gift to humanity. But it's a tool, nothing more. So if that's what you mean I agree.

[ubergossen]

... I think this is the same tribe that only uses the present tense, unless I'm thinking of a different tribe.

[rationalmuscle]

@ubergossen Yes, you are correct. They have no past nor future tense. What a trip it would be to chat with them.

[ceezmad1]

The fora tv for this story is great, that was the first video I faved on my old account.

[rationalmuscle]

@ceezmad1 Indeed... I love that vid.

[sonic8005]

I always hate those copouts from the Bible where it's like, they claim that everybody knows or everybody can see that their religion is right... or those bland statements which should just scream at the world that are completely one hundred percent false...

[rationalmuscle]

Yeah, and it goes beyond the quote I used from Paul (although that one is a hoot and a holler.) My personal favorite

"universal guffaw" is one of Christiandumbs' (sic) favorite passages of "prophecy" -- the re-establishment of Israel as a nation, which most claim occurred in 1947. If they read the 'entire' passage, they'd see the prophet said that NO ONE in the city would not worship Yahve, even the animals.

"Yeah, just ignore that BIG MOSQUE" in the middle of the city...praise Jesus! "

[vitb6]

I liked that quote from Romans,think i may have heard it before!. I kno the islamic position is ppl are born wiv a belife in god, only society may take them away from tht natural disposition, but hey its all interesting stuff. Personally i think god is a rationale CONCEPT, life comes from where and how is the arth sustained, but wot God means depends on ppls soceities and influences.

[rationalmuscle]

@vitb6 That's an interesting position, as study after study shows that children have no theistic leanings at all without culture and society to shove it upon them. So I would think it is the other way around -- we are born 'without any' knowledge of a god and those blanks are filled in by society. Take for example the Romans. Why were they compelled to worship 100s of gods rather than one? What influence were they born under? Something to consider... : )

[Koolvedge]

@sonic8005 true

[filthyphillyboy]

WOW. This is amazing. You sure as heck learn something new every day. If you try.

[rationalmuscle]

Thanks fithyphillyboy!

[kadene2]

More power to the Piraha! They have not bought into self condemnation and they sound quite even-tempered, well-balanced and good natured. They don't need consoling. I like that. And death is a part of life. Doesn't frighten them (as much as it does believers) And on top of this, they're happy most of the time. Sound like folks I could deinitely hang out with.

[rationalmuscle]

Indeed. The fact that they've incorporated a fearless approach to death is really powerful. Most tribal people from what I have read either fear it or have a spiritual belief that makes it positive. A remarkable group of people!

[Koolvedge]

@kadene2 yes, very kool people

[Ramshobraja]

Wow. Evidence over faith. WIsh more people took that concept seriously.

[rationalmuscle]

Nifty, isn't it? ; )

[adamXcore]

Not sure what this is getting at. @rationalmuscle, is he inferring that in the absence of these religious myths (creation, heaven/hell, god, etc), society can progress to a more advanced state?

[believerornot]

@adamXcore

I think he is saying that their is no need for religion. Without it people still have morality, love and all the normal things. They do not have the bonds of religion, such as necessary guilt, Made up sin, the multiple neuroses that religion creates and the ability to be controlled through it.

Sounds good to me.

[adamXcore]

Oh. Well yes, of course, I don't think any reasonable theist would argue that (and to my knowledge, no respected Christian philosopher holds to that claim). WLC (just to pick on him for a moment) argues that God is necessary for moral ontology, not moral epistemology- or rather, that God is necessary, not for our ability to recognize good or to be good, but for the meaning of the value of "good" to have any objective meaning. To my knowledge, he seems to have a point. Idk, I saw his debate with

[adamXcore]

Shelly Kagan regarding this very subject. Kagan made a few interesting objections (alluding to Social Contract theory, moral relativity's not having to mean by necessity that immoral things are insignificant just because they have no ultimate significance, etc) but yet I was left, still, feeling that Craig hadn't been properly put in his place on this issue. Idk, it appears that his Moral Argument for the Existence of God commits some sort of fallacy, but I just can't put my finger on it. Help?

[believerornot]

Personally I feel the terms good and evil are meaningless when applied to morality. People act from selfish motivation no matter what they do. A seemingly selfless act is usually done because it benefits the person committing the act. Even if the only benefit is that it makes the person feel better about themselves.

[believerornot]

Evil is a black and white term applied to many different crimes and criminals but human behaviour is not black and white. The most evil psychotic is that way because of mental disorder not because the devil made him that way

Stealing may be considered evil but can it still be so when it it to feed yourself or when it is the only way to feed a drug habit?

All so called evil acts are the result of some physical or mental deficiency. Its all way to complex to describe here but you get the idea.

[adamXcore]

@believerornot Of course, and I'd rightly agree with most of what you've said. However, while there are certainly are varying degrees of what people call "evil" and "good", and they are done all under innumerably different circumstances, the point that people like Francis Beckwith and William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland all seem to be driving home is not what IS good (again, that is irrelevant to the subject at hand), but rather the ability for something TO BE ABLE to be "good" or "evil". When

[believerornot]

Arguments based around Good and Evil fail to address the point that morality is nothing more than a human concept. We invented it! Animals do not think about the morality of their actions, only humans do this. I think in fact morality is social concept. What we really have is not morality but behaviour; some of which benefit individuals and some of which benefit society and of course the opposites. Morality is a kind of unwritten rule book regarding behaviour, and I think it muddies the waters.

[adamXcore]

For some reason the rest of my reply isn't showing up. I've saved it in a notepad doc for later use.

And forgive me, please, believerornot, but I'm having a hard time understanding your point. I can't see how, if you truly adopt your point into your worldview, you can praise or condemn anything. Your position seems to leave things like the Crusades, Holocaust, etc in the area of only being societal misfortunes, and nothing more. Wouldn't you agree?

[believerornot]

@adamXcore

Its difficult to explain. To a certain extent I agree with that. I feel that acceptable behaviour is determined by the majority (rightly or wrongly). A majority can be swayed by an idea, a single person or a group. During the Holocaust the Germans involved  must have felt that what they were doing was for the right reasons just as the crusaders did. cont...

[believerornot]

@adamXcore There is also the abdication of responsibility argument. "I was only following orders". People will commit terrible acts if they feel it is not their responsibility. This does not negate the terrible result but it does give us insight into human behaviour.

Another thing to bear in mind is like animals humans tend to favour pecking orders. Some want to be in charge, while others are content to follow orders. cont2...

[believerornot]

@adamXcore

cont..2 This is an over simplification really but it explains much human to human aggression.

These base instincts get mixed in with complex thought and emotion and the result is varying behaviour, both socially acceptable and not. A vast spectrum of very human behaviour.

We are at a stage where we can actually a code of human morality but who would make the final decisions?

[trippedbreaker]

rationalmuscle, this is a great video, and I certainly appreciate that you've posted it.

However, despite being on your side of the argument I have to admit that you're really ruining it in the comments. The pointless invective and insulting other people for their opinions is not gaining you any converts. Are you trying to enlighten people, or document your superiority over the "morons"?

[rationalmuscle]

Hi Trippedbreaker... thanks for your comments. I do hear you man. I just have very little patience for people who start the process. I never start it... I do tend to finish it. But yes, the message can get buried under such an approach. Thanks for the reminder.

[Devast8ion]

Rational muscle, you can spew puerile ad hominems all you want. You're just going to end up wasting your time. If you can't separate dogmatic religion from spiritual thinking, then you've already illustrated your intellectual deficit.

[rationalmuscle]

Perhaps you should look up the nifty words you're attempting to use within context. "Ad hominem" is not an insult; it's a defense 'based upon' an attack of the one making it. Calling you an idiot for spewing your nonsense was merely a citation; the counter argument however was "culture vs state of advancement."

Do your homework; then make an argument or shut the fuck up.

[LiesMakeBabyJesusCry]

@rationalmuscle Do you know where I can find the rest of the lecture?

[rationalmuscle]

You should be able to Google the author and find it that way. I'm not sure where I found it otherwise I'd shoot you a link. ; )

[LiesMakeBabyJesusCry]

The lecture is entitled: Endangered Languages and Lost Knowledge for anyone interested. Thanks for uploading anyway.

[rationalmuscle]

More evidence that morons like yourself cannot distinguish a culture from a state of advancement. And if you think for a 'second' that religion had ANYTHING to do with progression of science and society, you're an even bigger idiot than this post suggests. Religious sheep were drug kicking and screaming into the modern age, fighting against it with cries of 'demons' and 'end of the world'.

Learn your history before you open your mouth.

[Devast8ion]

More evidence that lack of spirituality isn't a sign of advancement but of a primitive mind.

[KarthikSoun]

a degenerative puke inventing weapons out of his fear is advanced!!

[baddave62]

@Devast8ion

You're an idiot. Some of the most advanced peoples (and least religious) are found in the Scandanavian countries. I'll bet you did zero research before making your stupid comment.

[jojoinhere]

very good!

[sylence7]

is there a full video of this somewhere!?!? 8D

[a0eoj]

I'd like to congratulate you for your deconversion, and also applaud you for your honesty about your experience. As a fellow atheist, with a mostly religious (god-fearing christian) family, I've often wondered what I could say or do to change their minds. It almost seems to require extraordinary integrity just to be able to question certain preconceived ideas. If it's possible to pinpoint, what was it that finally convinced you there is no god?

[rationalmuscle]

Thank you a0eoj... much appreciated.

I'm more in the camp of an anti-theist, in that I have yet to see any claims that stood up to scrutiny. And I agree with Dawkins when he says, "No one can say for sure there is no god, but then again no one can say for sure there are no fairies either."

My deconversion was primarily due to examining both the historicity of the accounts, textual critique and the morals depicted by Yahveh.

[a0eoj]

When you say, "the historicity of the accounts," are you referring to the historicity of, and discrepancies among, the gospel accounts of Jesus? Was Bart Ehrman, by any chance, influencial in your deconversion process? I'm sorry to be such a stickler, but I'm really try to pinpoint exactly what it takes to deconvert people. I've just about given up on my own family, but people like you give me hope. Thanks

[rationalmuscle]

Well, Bart was and continues to be a good source for textual criticism, but I was trained in theology (being a former minister) so, to be honest, it was less critique and more historical inaccuracies, how the Bible was cannonized, and what is actually 'in' the text itself.

Unless an apologist or believer is simply daydreaming they cannot come up with an answer for why their god didn't just act violently but commanded it, institutionalized slavery, and botched so many historical facts.

[Eopyk]

Sorry I have not amde a response yet .. sorry..

All love from me Jasmine

[Katalyzt]

★★★★★

[limegreensquid]

Very interesting, i've never heard of them, but it sounds like they've got it right!

[Eopyk]

Oh I tend to confuse C and S in the endings of words.

All love :)

[Eopyk]

I will make a responce to this later on :) I have read alot about this culture.

[rationalmuscle]

Look forward to it!

[Sack42]

I can see pros and cons to that way of life. No mythology for one, no lies, no empty threats, no ideas of absolute morallity. However, there's also no drive to seek more knowledge...

[Sandolainen]

Why would there be no drive to seek more knowledge just because they don't have a god? Pretty much all scientists of today are atheists, and they certainly have a great drive to seek knowledge.

[Sack42]

I never implied that... It's part of what he said, the piraha don't venture further than the "here and now." For example, when he asked what the planet was like before there was water, they don't know, nor do they care. That's all I was saying, sorry if it came across a little ambiguously =/

[Sandolainen]

Oh, ok. Sorry for that then =) That would surely be a bit.. sad.

[rationalmuscle]

True, I suppose. I 'do' believe that myths help us grow, at least to a point. Part of what drives us to learn more may very well be an innate "no way" reaction to some of the myths we encounter. Hard to say for sure, but an interesting point. Thanks.

[PassionForThought]

Example: Mythbusters

[rationalmuscle]

Yep.

[Vogter2100]

Well I love the pirahas :)

[ProjectPaladin]

quite interesting... very appreciated...

[dualranger]

Thank you for posting this rationalmuscle.